From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack. Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15509"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 18 15:51:09 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n9ppF-0003r5-06 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:51:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48222 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n9ppD-0002O6-NK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 09:51:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38198) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n9oJS-0002nk-Dn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:41210) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n9oJP-0001OA-Jy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:13 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DB063440F51; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:08 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8102C440D08; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:07 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1642511647; bh=VHMdpHyhM91JAa1Owklwq2l+6zUKDEEyxnbTTFLfHsw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=kT6sSZg8ElKCQqock9sjlpoFCnWenGmiSTm2fWiTYLFzHgmhDzKhsVnNGnfhoKeNB EGMZVT7ikXq7DoqdlRPQERCcmrNer2eqDT4BOv/PvrOKjQxVd2sFloSOe8nkYq0NpZ D6Ln0FO7SYWORlX5O5EUmNZwoonoePP2WSKRT+lazXVDfSlKOiX9s2d0w0Nh8bnjo/ BK2rAqr2pxMaS6Th3X0PlSSuKtqx+svv4oHb1V3JEn4Gzipio0MI8nlsez2ySMo5W3 /qCnAqtGeXKzmqYbp9GAYOtkZBId9wfIRUd2KA41RswbNfYjb3gKtuSDrGp3TKMF1u jaIPRIaHiYnoA== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [216.154.30.173]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B92C120871; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:14:07 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Tue, 18 Jan 2022 11:56:38 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284923 Archived-At: >> > -.PHONY: compile-first compile-main compile compile-always >> > +.PHONY: compile-zeroth compile-first compile-main compile compile-always > >> > -compile-first: $(COMPILE_FIRST) >> > +compile-zeroth: $(COMPILE_ZEROTH) >> > +compile-first: compile-zeroth $(COMPILE_FIRST) > >> Is this necessary, or is it just helpful to debug the Makefile? > > I'm not sure. I'm a little confused, still. At least I can't see why `compile-first` should need to depend on `compile-zeroth` since the %.elc: %.el $(COMPILE_ZEROTH) rule should already give the same result. So I'd suggest you drop this part of the patch and see if that causes any kind of trouble. > +ifeq ($(HAVE_NATIVE_COMP),yes) > +COMPILE_ZEROTH = $(COMPILE_FIRST:.elc=.elc0) > +endif I think we can drop the `ifeq` test here. As for eyeballing: LGTM, thank you. Stefan